Declining Student Resilience: A Serious Problem for Colleges

College personnel everywhere are struggling with students' increased neediness.

A year ago I received an invitation from the head of Counseling Services at a major university to join faculty and administrators for discussions about how to deal with the decline in resilience among students. At the first meeting, we learned that emergency calls to Counseling had more than doubled over the past five years. Students are increasingly seeking help for, and apparently having emotional crises over, problems of everyday life. Recent examples mentioned included a student who felt traumatized because her roommate had called her a “bitch” and two students who had sought counseling because they had seen a mouse in their off-campus apartment. The latter two also called the police, who kindly arrived and set a mousetrap for them.

Source: Google images approved for reuse.

Faculty at the meetings noted that students’ emotional fragility has become a serious problem when it comes to grading. Some said they had grown afraid to give low grades for poor performance, because of the subsequent emotional crises they would have to deal with in their offices. Many students, they said, now view a C, or sometimes even a B, as failure, and they interpret such “failure” as the end of the world. Faculty also noted an increased tendency for students to blame them (the faculty) for low grades—they weren’t explicit enough in telling the students just what the test would cover or just what would distinguish a good paper from a bad one. They described an increased tendency to see a poor grade as reason to complain rather than as reason to study more, or more effectively. Much of the discussions had to do with the amount of handholding faculty should do versus the degree to which the response should be something like, “Buck up, this is college.” Does the first response simply play into and perpetuate students’ neediness and unwillingness to take responsibility? Does the second response create the possibility of serious emotional breakdown, or, who knows, maybe even suicide?

Two weeks ago, that head of Counseling sent us all a follow-up email, announcing a new set of meetings. His email included this sobering paragraph:

“I have done a considerable amount of reading and research in recent months on the topic of resilience in college students. Our students are no different from what is being reported across the country on the state of late adolescence/early adulthood. There has been an increase in diagnosable mental health problems, but there has also been a decrease in the ability of many young people to manage the everyday bumps in the road of life. Whether we want it or not, these students are bringing their struggles to their teachers and others on campus who deal with students on a day-to-day basis. The lack of resilience is interfering with the academic mission of the University and is thwarting the emotional and personal development of students.”

He also sent us a summary of themes that emerged in the series of meetings, which included the following bullets:

Less resilient and needy students have shaped the landscape for faculty in that they are expected to do more handholding, lower their academic standards, and not challenge students too much.

There is a sense of helplessness among the faculty. Many faculty members expressed their frustration with the current situation. There were few ideas about what we could do as an institution to address the issue.

Students are afraid to fail; they do not take risks; they need to be certain about things. For many of them, failure is seen as catastrophic and unacceptable. External measures of success are more important than learning and autonomous development.

Faculty, particularly young faculty members, feel pressured to accede to student wishes lest they get low teacher ratings from their students. Students email about trivial things and expect prompt replies.

Failure and struggle need to be normalized. Students are very uncomfortable in not being right. They want to re-do papers to undo their earlier mistakes. We have to normalize being wrong and learning from one’s errors.

Faculty members, individually and as a group, are conflicted about how much “handholding” they should be doing.

Growth is achieved by striking the right balance between support and challenge. We need to reset the balance point. We have become a “helicopter institution.”

Reinforcing the claim that this is a nationwide problem, the Chronicle of Higher Education recently ran an article by Robin Wilson entitled, “An Epidemic of Anguish: Overwhelmed by Demand for Mental-Health Care, Colleges Face Conflicts in Choosing How to Respond" (Aug. 31, 2015). Colleges and universities have traditionally been centers for higher academic education, where the expectation is that the students are adults, capable of taking care of their own everyday life problems. Increasingly, students and their parents are asking the personnel at such institutions to be substitute parents. There is also the ever-present threat and reality of lawsuits. When a suicide occurs, or a serious mental breakdown occurs, the institution is often held responsible.

On the basis of her interviews with heads of counseling offices at various colleges and universities, Wilson wrote:

“Families often expect campuses to provide immediate, sophisticated, and sustained mental-health care. After all, most parents are still adjusting to the idea that their children no longer come home every night, and many want colleges to keep an eye on their kids, just as they did. Students, too, want colleges to give them the help they need, when they need it. And they need a lot. Rates of anxiety and depression among American college students have soared in the last decade, and many more students than in the past come to campus already on medication for such illnesses. The number of students with suicidal thoughts has risen as well. Some are dealing with serious issues, such as psychosis, which typically presents itself in young adulthood, just when students are going off to college. Many others, though, are struggling with what campus counselors say are the usual stresses of college life: bad grades, breakups, being on their own for the first time. And they are putting a strain on counseling centers.”

In previous posts (for example, here and here), I have described the dramatic decline, over the past few decades, in children’s opportunities to play, explore, and pursue their own interests away from adults. Among the consequences, I have argued, are well-documented increases in anxiety and depression, and decreases in the sense of control of their own lives. We have raised a generation of young people who have not been given the opportunity to learn how to solve their own problems. They have not been given the opportunity to get into trouble and find their own way out, to experience failure and realize they can survive it, to be called bad names by others and learn how to respond without adult intervention. So now, here’s what we have: Young people,18 years and older, going to college still unable or unwilling to take responsibility for themselves, still feeling that if a problem arises they need an adult to solve it.

Dan Jones, past president of the Association for University and College Counseling Center Directors, seems to agree with this assessment. In an interview for the Chronicle article, he said:

“[Students] haven’t developed skills in how to soothe themselves, because their parents have solved all their problems and removed the obstacles. They don’t seem to have as much grit as previous generations.”

In my next post I’ll examine the research evidence suggesting that so-called “helicopter parenting” really is at the core of the problem. But I don’t blame parents, or certainly not just parents. Parents are in some ways victims of larger forces in society—victims of the continuous exhortations from “experts” about the dangers of letting kids be, victims of the increased power of the school system and the schooling mentality that says kids develop best when carefully guided and supervised by adults, and victims of increased legal and social sanctions for allowing kids into public spaces without adult accompaniment. We have become, unfortunately, a “helicopter society.”

If we want to prepare our kids for college—or for anything else in life!—we have to counter these social forces. We have to give our children the freedom, which children have always enjoyed in the past, to get away from adults so they can practice being adults—that is, practice taking responsibility for themselves.

Source: Basic Books, with permission

And now, what do you think?

Have you witnessed in any way the kinds of changes in young adults described here and that seem to be plaguing colleges and universities? How have you, as a parent, negotiated the line between protecting your children and giving them the freedom they need for psychological growth? Do you have any suggestions for college counselors and professors about how to deal with these problems they are struggling with?

I invite you to share your stories, thoughts, and questions in the comments section below. This blog is, among other things, a forum for discussion. As always, I prefer if you post your comments and questions here rather than send them to me by private email. By putting them here, you share with other readers, not just with me. I read all comments and try to respond to all serious questions if I think I have something worth saying. Of course, if you have something to say that applies only to you and me, then send me an email.

American obsession with oversight, Homeland Security and control is not going to change this new perverse way of parenting. Parents have been given the green light to control their child's every move and leave very little for children to take responsibility. Parents unleash their children to universities with the expectation that universities will assume their parenting model. Parents are paying $50,000/year for this "education" but is really little more than a babysitting service these days.

Top employers are already on to this. They understand that a recent university diploma means very little. Instead of a college degree they as young people to highlight recent independent projects and hacks. I think that is smart policy.

I would guess a portion (if not a lot) of this emotional volatility on the part of students comes from anxiety about the lack of economic opportunities that students continue to face post-college. Competitiveness of grad school admissions, and for decent jobs in general is up significantly.

This makes students much more anxious in general, and can make small issues seem like larger problems. You don't just graduate college and find a decent paying job anymore.

What you say may be true but does not completely explain the problems mentioned in this article. I am a middle school teacher and see the same problems there. Most of my students are not yet worried about getting a good paying job, yet I see their lack of resilience and independence on an almost daily basis.

Gretchen, I teach middle school as well and I had the same thought as I was reading this. I try to let students fail but administration steps in and I am given "suggestions" on how to help my students succeed. The politics in the school, to meet goals, is making it difficult for teachers, to allow students to learn what success really can be for them.

I agree. I used to be a middle-school teacher as well. Although my class was easy to pass if you did the work, some students chose not to do the work, and chose to fail instead. I figured it was a learning experience.

Nope.

The admin stepped in and "suggested" I change the students grades by allowing them a few weeks after the report card to "make up" the work they chose not to complete. I told them to do as they saw fit, and I left that school at the end of the year.

The "make-up" work expectation is damaging. Students are taught, artificially, that time can be undone by not being allowed to experience the natural consequences of their actions. Only when they feel the consequences do they want to change their ways, and are thus taught to live backwards rather than forwards. They learn the false lesson that life provides them with perpetually do-overs. The administration is just interested in doing whatever it takes to get the students through and achieve the targets they are accountable for.

Some of it, yes. What I think our teacher friends above are saying is that this allowed *all* the time. Sometimes, things outside of one's control happen, and yes, you can allow a student another opportunity. But then you have the students who just choose not to do an assignment, are given another chance, and then still don't do it. As the teacher, you attempt to hold them accountable, but the administration won't allow you to do so.

I taught high school for 10 years, most of it with juniors. Some of my students were already legal adults. They were 2 years from graduation, I attempted to enforce personal responsibility...and well, that's one of the major reasons I left the classroom.

I am a HS mathematics teacher, and do beloeve that everyone learns at a different pace. For this reason I do believe in re-testing or "improving" assignments. In order for a student to even ask to re-do a test or assignment they must submit their own action plan as to how they are going to show they have learned the material. Once they have completed this, I will give them an alternate assignment/test. In short, I want them to focus on the learning and not the grade!

It's good to read a post from a teacher who is not pontificating about the younger generation's supposed defects (pontificating which short-sighted older adults have been doing for centuries) but is instead happily focused on helping students to learn! From a fellow teacher who is regularly blown away by her students' resilience and strength, Bravo!

Submitted by sangkarsangkarbesibaja.wordpress.com on December 7, 2015 - 1:32am

Nice post. I learn something totally new and challenging on websites I stumbleupon every day.
It will always be useful to read through articles from other authors and use a little something from other sites.

Yes, everyone does learn at a different pace and in different
ways- I am an example of "different", but they are going out
into a world that really does not care about that and need to
be prepared to cope.

Agreed, many times over. After 25 years teaching high school, I had to get out when the landscape changed and was spending all my preparation time per week dealing with absent/suspended makeup work, parents questioning grades, and administrators questioning my judgment and/or wanting updates. Now I'm a grad student at a 4-year university, teaching English composition. These students freak out when given low scores for poor work. How many employers are going to give them do-overs when they cannot perform to standards? The world doesn't work that way, and I feel badly for them.

I agree with the comments made here about inability to cope in an academic environment suggests they'll not be ready for the 'real' world. Perhaps some students may acquire the GPA to attend college, but they're not socially and or emotionally equipped. Some people could benefit from not attending college immediately after graduating high school. A job and an apartment, or paying rent at home, could bolster their ability to manage being responsible for themselves. Failing grades can be attributed to the student being unprepared to satisfactorily managing the subject matter or some fault may be assigned to the educators, teachers, administrators, and parents. Quality of the teacher's material/presentation; administration's yielding to pressure to have high academic 'report cards' for school boards to have budgets passed without considering the standard/quality of education; parents who expect too much or too little from their child. Parents may not be equipped to assist their child with their schoolwork because of their own level of education or time constraints. Some parents feel their child has too much schoolwork and may even complete the assignments, of course leaving child less prepared to pass an examination on subject material. I wouldn't want a physician attending to my needs if they didn't graduate having met all of the requirements. However, to conclude my comments, the world is looking for highly QUALIFIED employable people.

To "feel badly" is to be incapable of effectively using your tactile organs. If my fingertips are too numb for me to tell whether that fabric is smooth or rough, then I feel badly, but the fabric itself would feel (seem to be) either smooth or rough.

Lisa,
I feel bad that you feel compelled to correct someone's language like this.
Ultimately it is common usage that determines correct usage.
Better to ask people to clarify unspecified verbs and abstract nouns.

My experiences teaching science in a Canadian high school are the same as yours. Students were not interested in learning but wanted high marks just to "get into university". Administration didn't want to hear complaints from students or parents that a certain teacher was "too hard". Teachers were told to "individualize" the instruction and evaluations in order to maximize the grades. In the last years of my teaching career, everyone (except myself) was satisfied when grades were calculated using only the work the students submitted, ignoring anything not completed, and failed tests could be rewritten. It looks like universities are now dealing with the same pressures. Students might now be trying to deal with the reality that their work (and self esteem) are substandard.

Yes! I totally agree! The point should be the learning, not the grades!
We moved from the Finnish school system to the US, and we will move back because of the schools/parents.
I have some smart kids, and I want them to become independent innovative, and mentally strong adults.
All his A mania doesn't even allow kids to figure out what they are truly good at, just fuels the tutoring madness.

In reasonable situations some leeway is ok but those are things like major life events (ex. deaths) that impact the students functioning. It really isn't that common in the working world (or shouldn't be) to have make ups or do overs. Some jobs (like graphic design or programming) have an inherent level of tweeking and making it perfect for a client. Most jobs if you screw up you get in trouble or should be in trouble. And if its severe or repetitive you are fired. And some (doctors or lawyers) have zero tolerance for mistakes.

I am a lawyer, a mom of a college student and high school junior, and a grad student in special ed. True: Lawyers simply cannot make big mistakes, because the mistake affects important personal concerns of another human being. True: Many, many parents are reluctant to let their kids fail/fend for themselves these days. This is a mistake because people learn more from failures than successes -- the more a child can learn under the attentive watch of a parent the better.

We have many social problems at work that account for "helicopter" parenting. (1) The decline of the play-neighborhood in which children can safely play together, attended by stay-at-home moms in almost every home who keep a watchful eye on all of the kids. Kids' playtime is scheduled by parents, now. (2) Decline of household earnings. Parents have to work more to keep a household running. This means less time for parent-child moments, and an increase in parents' need (not want -- "need") to insist that people who interact with their children (e.g., teachers) be partners in solving problems at school fast -- "let my kid do it over" means the problem (a bad grade) is resolved. Yes. It may be shortsighted, but just about every decision made in American-family households is fast and on the fly because there's no time - largely due to the parents' need to keep up their family's income. (3) Schools are reluctant to go to the mat and back up effective teachers -- there's a lot of financial pressure on schools to avoid tying up administrator time and/or defend lawsuits by disgruntled parents.

Our nations' college co-eds are much less mature than earlier generations when they entered college. The forces at work that account for this, however, are very hard to change.

When are do-overs allowed in the "real-world"? Sometimes an incorrectly prepared meal can be sent back. Sometimes a marketing campaign can be revised. However, the customer rarely returns to the restaurant that incorrectly prepared the meal. The marketing company eventually loses the client because the marketing company didn't perform as delineated in the contract. A defense attorney who fails to win verdicts in his/her favor only gets a do-over in appeals, but appeals eventually end. A lawyer who fails to win verdicts in his/her clients favor, will have a difficult time gaining new clients.

So, yes, we are allowed some do-overs outside academia. Do-overs influence overall outcomes just as much as the original poor performance.

As humans we can learn from our do-overs, if allowed the opportunity, but allowing too many do-overs in academia does not truly prepare one for life beyond academia.

I am in complete agreement. As a public educator, I have witnessed what our educational "policies" have done to our students. We have created an environment where students and parents feel that every child is entitled to a certain grade regardless of the effort given or mastery of concepts. This has led into not allowing students to learn from failure. K-12 education is the best time for students to learn that it is possible to fail, how to cope with failure, and how to turn failure into success. We have lost sight that an important component of education is to teach these concepts along with content curriculum. More than often when this issue is addressed the "solution" only feeds into the problem. Students are now being driven to "master" concepts before they are cognitively ready to fully comprehend them. This leads to panic not only in the student but the educational system as well. Panic tends to lead to the compulsion of saving kids from disappointment when we should be teaching them how to cope and learn from it.

I completely agree with you. And your statement that "students are driven to master skills they are not cognitively ready to understand" is very true! All I could think of as I read through the article is the great need of implementing social- emotional curriculums. We can't expect children to learn coping skills on their own.

Edith, I disagree that students can't learn coping skills on their own. In generations past, we often were left to our own devices because whatever we had done, we needed to get out of the situation before we were discovered by the adult world, whether it was off in a park where we and a group of playmates had just spent the day alone. Something not too good might have happened,we
had an adventure, something got burned up on the stove, all those little mishaps we wiggled our way out of. Some were harmless, some not, but we had to solve the problem by ourselves. We are not giving children time for that in play or in the process of growing up. Every second is planned for. My mother used to use that old expression "well you crapped on it, now clean it up yourself."

I wonder if this isn't the heart of the matter, the relentless scheduling of music/dance/karate lessons, tutoring and other activities designed to give one's kid an edge. Very little time is left for just explorative play and the associated risks it entails.

I agree, Elaine. We decided to try to do less (schedule our kids in fewer things... homeschool... pick fewer activities for the whole family... create more "down time"), and now we find ourselves alone ALL THE TIME. Nobody has time to "just hang out." :( The neighborhoods are empty wastelands for 90 percent of the daylight hours. Very sad.

I agree, Elaine. We decided to try to do less (schedule our kids in fewer things... homeschool... pick fewer activities for the whole family... create more "down time"), and now we find ourselves alone ALL THE TIME. Nobody has time to "just hang out." :( The neighborhoods are empty wastelands for 90 percent of the daylight hours. Very sad.

This is very sad indeed. How did we ever get into such a mess? My heart is very heavy for the future. Along with being alone a lot, I've noticed a pervasive meanness in people in general. Things are changing from one of kindness and helpfulness to a mean "gotta get this done leave me alone or I will attack you" mentality.

I had no siblings as a child, and I found MORE than enough to keep me not only occupied, but fascinated! And I'm talking about a family of very modest means: so the library got a workout, as did my imagination and the trees and the roller skates and shoe and cereal boxes, and remnants from my mother's sewing chest, etc.

No computers, no iPhones, no CD players (no TV till Thanksgiving of 3rd grade, and even then, limited in quantity and subject to parental selectivity), no fancy toys (but plenty of construction paper, crayons, scissors, tape and pencils).

In many ways, the over-abundance of modern U.S. society is unhealthy for kids growing up. Dirt poverty might be too extreme, but a minimalist childhood might be just the ticket.

I could not agree more! I think the fact that kids can sit in their bedrooms and have every bit of information COME TO THEM with no effort is a major factor. They no longer use a library to gather information, they use the Internet. They don't build barometers, they Google it and immediately - with NO EFFORT on their part, the information is in their hands and they immediately "know" how things work. They are falsely under the impression that things come without effort. It is so frustrating. It's strangely reassuring to see that others are seeing this major change as well, and it's not just my husband and me.

It isn't only the lack of time... my millenial kids were raised by their stay at home dad who let them go out and play as early as 4 or 5.... We had angry neighborhood moms who told us NOT to send them over without calling and arranging for play dates, angry moms who had to contend with their own kids complaining that they too, were competent enough to cross the street without supervision, angry moms who called and asked how much time the kids were left on their own playing video games. Our kids are both in college, very driven and comfortable managing pretty much every element of their own lives. I'm sure society will figure out a way to punish them for their initiative and success before too long.

Did I misunderstand this? He let them out to play as early as 4 or 5? Does this mean in the morning or the afternoon? I mean, 4 a.m.??? Or why is it early to let them out at 4 or 5 pm? The sun is fading fast by that time.

my millenial kids were raised by their stay at home dad who let them go out and play as early as 4 or 5....

What do you mean by "let them go out and play"? Like, just crossing the street to go to a friend's house? Or hanging out around the neighborhood, riding bikes or doing whatever, unsupervised for over an hour at a time. Because when I hear "go out and play" I think the latter, as I think most people would. And I think four years old, or five years old is awfully young for that. I'm glad that your unsupervised kids weren't ever kidnapped or otherwise debilitatingly traumatized. It is great that your kids are able to achieve success and be in college. Please understand, though, that many people might consider it a risky practice to let a 4 or 5 year old go out to play unsupervised. While I am a firm believer in the good nature of most people, there are predators out there looking for unsupervised 4 or 5 year-olds. The danger is real. It only takes one.

I get the merits of giving children independence. They learn how to solve their own problems, become independent adults, etc. But don't act like your neighbors' response to your controversial parenting behavior was surprising or unwarranted. Perhaps they were just concerned for your children's safety and couldn't think of a better way to deal with that concern than by communicating it to you.

Or maybe I'm badly misinterpreting what you meant by "go out and play". Is that the case? If so I feel like you were deliberately making an effort, at least to some extent, to exaggerate the amount of freedom you gave your children and by extension the importance that has had on their subsequent successes.

Or maybe you really meant "4 or 5.... [o'clock]" like the other commenter thought. Idk, lol. What do you think?

Your comment supports the notion that as a society we have gone over the edge.

" . . . there are predators out there looking for unsupervised 4 or 5 year-olds. The danger is real. It only takes one."

There is this unsubstantiated belief that there are child predators lurking on every corner in every neighborhood. Are there predators out there? Yes. What are the chances of any one particular child being kidnapped or abused by a stranger? Rare. People need to start looking their own homes and families. This is where most abuse and harm occurs.

John Doe you are correct. This "predators everywhere" mentality coupled with a whole of "stranger danger" talk is crippling our children. Yes, you want to make your youngest children wary of strangers with candy and vans, but you also need to sit them down at a reasonable age - 10 or so? - and have a "real" talk with them about strangers and adult strangers - how to talk to them, how to react and what not to do. The problem is no one does it. No one. So you in addition to the litany of other issues mention in the article and comments, you have young adults who are just afraid to talk to strangers or don't know how. There are approx. 1100 child abductions by strangers (as opposed to family and family friends) each year. That number hasn't changed drastically in decades. DECADES!! The odds are very, very low that this will happen. And as far as sexual abuse are concerned, well, it's mostly by who you know - not strangers. From a DOJ website: An estimated 60% of perpetrators of sexual abuse are known to the child but are not family members, e.g., family friends, babysitters, child care providers, neighbors.
About 30% of perpetrators of child sexual abuse are family members.
Only about 10% of perpetrators of child sexual abuse are strangers to the child.
Not all perpetrators are adults—an estimated 23% of reported cases of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by individuals under the age of 18.

The point is not to be dismissive of the danger from sexual predators. Children can survive the usual cuts and scratches of childhood, even a broken arm or a leg, but sexual abuse, especially a kidnapping, is forever.
How to arrive at a means of prevention that is not as bad as the injury?
Its not an easy question to answer.

That is exactly this stupid American paranoia - I grew up in Switzerland - we were all out, unsupervised, at the age of 4! For hours and hours - riding bicycles, getting dirty in the sandpit, climbing trees, etc. Best time of my life! Guess how many of my childhood friends were kidnapped.... not a single one.
Nobody thinks it is "risky practice" to let kids play outside unsupervised - except Americans.